In order to %1$slearn poker%2$s and receive %1$sfree poker money%2$s, you need to activate JavaScript in your browser.

This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

Maybe he figured that you'd c/r or even c/c flop w made hand in this spot and your range for preflop call is quite wide since it's bvb so it's not like JJ+, even if his read is wrong he's rarely drawing dead.

Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Maybe he figured that you'd c/r or even c/c flop w made hand in this spot and your range for preflop call is quite wide since it's bvb so it's not like JJ+, even if his read is wrong he's rarely drawing dead.

Anyway, do you have a balanced range for donk bettin flops?

Yes, I don't donkbet flops only with draws... I usually think about the situation I'm in and try to play optimally (although I definetely don't play optimally all the time), I don't worry too much about not being exploitable against most opponents since I believe many of them are not too observant (especially fish with the "I-don't-wanna-be-bluffed-syndrome").

But anyway, in this case, I'd definetely donkbet with made hands as well since I'm pretty sure villain is raising me almost always here (given his syndrome). The only difference is that with made hands I'd probably just call his raise and probably make a very smallish bet on the turn trying to induce a shove from him, of course after seeing him play like this I'm always shoving made hands here against him.
This is definetely exploitable against observant players so I'd mix my play against these opponents, but against non-observant fish I'd rather just play the way I think it's optimal without really worrying about being exploitable or not.

Definetely he's rarely drawing near dead here, but the best case scenario for him is this one where he's slightly ahead and I got a little surprised when he snaped me with A high and a BSD.

Originally posted by lennonac
IMO you are both

You played it very badly and he played it even worse. Why are you calling a 3 bet with QJs? major leak you have there

OMG... nitty-automaton syndrome

It's definetely a somewhat loose call OOP but against someone who's been defending his blinds a lot, more than 50% of steals he 3-bets... well, he's either running hot for the past 5-6 orbits or he's defending with a very wide range.

I choose the second option.

Major leak would be folding to his 3-bet everytime... well, unless when you have a premium hand. And when you do this you let a fish who has no clue what he's doing exploit a leak he doesn't even know you have.

Of course, you could also just open-fold QJs on the SB, but that just can't be good.

But what hands you are flatting here preflop? I imagine that you most likely 4bet or fold hands like AQ+ TT+ here,, maybe JJ+.
Sometimes flat w KK+ and what else? The more i think the more polarized your range looks here.

Anyway, if you think he's just a fish then we shouldn't search for a reason why he called.

I think that actually flatting here looks suspicious most of the time, so without any history, I'd probably 4-bet the strong hands and flat call with not so strong hands and try to bluff him off the pot later.

Now you're gonna tell me this is very exploitable... and I'm gonna have to agree with you. YES, this is VERY exploitable... against thinking and observant players who have some history with you. This was the first time I was playing with this guy, had maybe 50-60 hands on him... and even though I don't remember, I probably hadn't been caught bluffing on the previous hands (This was played some time ago, I don't remember every detail of the session). Even though most players are just not too observant, IMO they remember recent hands, so I'd avoid bluffing in this spot... since I didn't, that's probably not the case.

That's just my opinion, I might be wrong. But I think too many players worry too much about being non-exploitable against players who aren't really paying attention to the game or who doesn't have any history on them.

In this case, as I said, I'd always 4-bet strong hands and call with weaker hands to make it look suspicious and try to bluff him off on later streets.
(Obviously against this player, just calling didn't look suspicious at all, but I think it does against most unknowns.)
But even though playing this way is exploitable, the guy has no history with me, so he'd have to be able to see my cards or read my mind to exploit this. Of course, if he's a reg and we start to build some history between us I have to change this and mix things up to not become exploitable.

Of course there are some errors in my judgement, he obviously didn't react to my flat call the way I thought he would, and I'd say I thought my FE was a lot higher that it actually was here. I obviously never thought he'd stack off here that light.

Agree with you... 50-60 hands is not a lot, but well... I gotta work with what I have.

And this guy was really defending aggressively against almost every steal, not only my steals but other players steals as well. There's definetely an argument for folding since I'm OOP, but well, the hand is definetely ahead of his range... and I like the pain.

To deal with people that defend too much and very aggro just wait it out, give him a few walks, sooner or later you are going to pick up a real hand and take him to the bank, I think you just lost your head a bit with this hand.

A player like this is not a thinking player imo, most of the time they are just an aggro donk, which he clearly was.

Originally posted by lennonac
I think you just lost your head a bit with this hand.

No way kid... I know when I lose my head. Trust me.

As I said, there's an argument for folding here, and it's definetely not bad. But it's just not my style, I like to get in tough spots. Instead of waiting for big hands against aggro donks, I like to rebluff them... and when I shove they obviously can't rebluff me since I'm already all-in. This style is definetely variance rich, but it doesn't mean it's not profitable.

This guy was definetely not a thinking player as you said, but even most of the non-thinking donks in NL100 (at least on FTP) don't stack off this light. Actually most of the donks don't even stack off with smaller pairs in this spot, not because they are thinking or not, but because they just get afraid... and since I'm the one shoving, well, they can't rebluff me in case they're aggro donks.

Agree with you about position, but the guy has position on me every hand, except when I'm on the button... so IMO I have two choices, I look for another table or I fight back OOP.
Most people whould go for the standard choice and change tables... I go for the non-standard choice and fight back OOP.

Lately I've been actually experimenting a lot and playing non-standard and unconventional lines a lot, and playing this style in the last 30k hands I've been having a lot more success (and more fun) than in the past 3 years playing standard TAG ABC style.

i can't be bothered to read through the whole thread, but your PF call is pretty horrible, and the small donkbet is.. questionable. actually, I like it if he's very aggressive, but it's still very marginal because you never have a real strong hand here (you wouldn't donkbet T9/TT/99 etc... or would you?), so your hand is pretty much face up (as a semi-bluff, at least).

If you're faced with a guy who 3-bets steals a lot, just 4-bet bluff every now and then, and tighten up (so he'll be 3betting into your monsters much more). This is especially true from the SB, since it's by far the worst position to steal from (you wouldn't believe the $$ i make 3betting any two in the BB vs a too loose SB open raiser)

It's definetely a somewhat loose call OOP but against someone who's been defending his blinds a lot, more than 50% of steals he 3-bets... well, he's either running hot for the past 5-6 orbits or he's defending with a very wide range.

if your sample is that small, then it's definitely bad. 6 orbits is at most 6 steals (duh), and a normal restealing range is ~25-30% of hands. it's not *that* unlikely that reasonable hands every time, you know.

sorry if this post was completely incomprehensible, i'm fucking tired.

Originally posted by swissmoumout
you wouldn't donkbet T9/TT/99 etc... or would you?

If you had read through the whole thread you would know the answer is: Yes, I'd donkbet any made hand here.

Originally posted by swissmoumout
If you're faced with a guy who 3-bets steals a lot, just 4-bet bluff every now and then, and tighten up (so he'll be 3betting into your monsters much more).

I do 4-bet bluff. That doesn't mean it's bad to flat call.
Tightening up is not a bad adjusment. That doesn't mean it's the only one (or the better one).

Originally posted by swissmoumout
This is especially true from the SB, since it's by far the worst position to steal from (you wouldn't believe the $$ i make 3betting any two in the BB vs a too loose SB open raiser)

I agree with you, I'm actually pretty tight opening from the SB. I do loosen up considerably against nits though. That doesn't mean QJs should be open folded from the SB.

And yes... I do believe you make a lot of money 3-betting any two in the BB vs. a loose SB open raiser.

Originally posted by swissmoumout
if your sample is that small, then it's definitely bad. 6 orbits is at most 6 steals (duh), and a normal restealing range is ~25-30% of hands. it's not *that* unlikely that reasonable hands every time, you know.

Actually 6 orbits is at most 12 steals (duh).
I never said he was re-stealing only against me. Actually I said somewhere in the thread that you didn't read that he was defending against my steals and other players' steals.

Something I forgot to mention in the previous posts is that he was active in other positions as well and pushing people around post-flop.

And yes, it's still a small sample size... so, you're gonna wait until you have 500 or 1k hands on someone? Well, you know pretty well that you're only gonna have that amount of hands on the regs, and most people that are playing are casual players.
So you'll always have to work with 50, 100, 200 hands... usually not more than that.
And I also said it in a previous post in this thread that you didn't read.

I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself with the "thread-that-you-didn't-read" thing. But it just sucks having to repeat things I've already said... especially to someone who begins his post by saying "i can't be bothered to read through the whole thread".
Don't take me wrong, I appreciate every feedback but that "I'm-so-important" attitude that you started your post with is just ridiculous.

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by swissmoumout: 03.09.2009 06:04.

ffs, remind me not to post when i'm that tired >_<

sorry if my post came across as arrogant, that was not at all my intention. i didn't read the whole thread cause i was in the middle of a session (and probably somewhat tilted), and i had a couple similar hands just before that were still fresh on my mind (so when i saw the hand i just wanted to make a quick reply). i over-adjusted to a reg's (what i perceived as) too-aggressive 3 and 4bets, and i could've spewed a ton of money to him if i hadn't stopped right after (well, i did shove 77 into his TT but whatever). it's not the first time that happens either.. so what i really meant to say, was: be careful when dealing with aggressive players, *especially* if you haven't seen them show down weak / weird hands. it's very easy to over-adjust, so it may be wiser to play somewhat weak until you're sure you can really take away pots in marginal spots (i say that but i of course can't bring myself to do it.. just speculating
).
also, (personal opinion), i really don't like playing big pots out of position, especially if i'm going to bluff, so that's why i don't like to play QJs like that. i'll play more hands in position instead.
but clearly you don't mind it, and will follow through with your original plan, so it's fine.
don't get me wrong, i like the postflop too, i was just saying (repeating, rather) that it has to be balanced to be as profitable as it can be.

i think i'm repeating myself enough at this point to say good night.

oh, just realized, all that stuff i said about adjusting mostly applies to "good" aggro players, if it's a huge fish, then straight up value may be wiser (shouldn't be too hard to do vs someone who calls A high in that spot
)

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Faye6891: 03.09.2009 14:54.

Apologies accepted. Don't worry, we all do stupid things when tired.

As you noticed... I don't mind playing big pots OOP.

Actually, I don't recommend either, when I started playing LAG I was playing too many hands OOP and it's just not good at all so I've been adjusting that, but there are spots where I really don't mind at all.
Here in this spot OOP, I'll most likely have the chance to shove on the flop if I like the board texture (And the betting sequence did go exactly according to my plan... except for the part when he called with A high
). And from my experience most aggros (even the non-thinking donks) back down when other players fight back, you take away their possibility to shove on you and all they can do is back down and fold.

I believe I'll be right most of the time... but obviously, not this time against this particular opponent whom has been awarded an "Ace-high-stack-off-donk" note.

I also think it's a lot safer to wait and see them show down some weak hands before doing anything to avoid over-adjusting but it's so difficult to see aggro-donks showing down anything. They're just always pushing people around all the time their hands hardly ever go to showdown.
So, well... I take the dangerous route.

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Faye6891: 03.09.2009 16:03.

I deal with my mistakes and I didn't insult anyone... I'm sorry if calling you kid offended you, not my intention at all. But I know pretty well when I lose my head, and that just didn't happen.

As far as I can see it, the only mistake I did here was in my judgement due to the small amount of time played against this opponent, but most of the players I play against in a session, I usually don't see again so I like to take my chances based on my experience with a certain player type.

I actually never asked for advice, just posted because I felt like sharing the hand, after all it's not everyday you see someone stacking off this light. If I really wanted advice I would've posted it in the hand judging forums. I do appreciate any advice though.

The only thing I didn't like to hear was the "I can't be bothered to read through the whole thread", but that has been clarified. Swiss was probably having a bad session and tilting and came off as arrogant when he didn't mean to and that's completely understandable.

Quote "You are a fish."
Now who's insulting who?
BTW, that's exactly how you started your first post... calling me a fish. I didn't take it as insult, but you seem to get very pissed off because I said: "No way kid".
But if you think I'm a fish, that's ok, I don't care what you think about me.

And I didn't shoot down anyone. Actually Swiss and NightFrosta had very good arguments, and definetely playing the way they would is not bad, it might be even better than they way I played (I really don't know though, proving wich way is better would require some extensive research and mathematical calculations).
As far as I see it, we weren't trying to shoot down each other, we were just exchanging our different points of view in a given scenario, and you're the one trying to shoot me down. As if folding PF is the only good way to play the hand or waiting for a big hand is the only good adjustment against an aggro player.
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention that Alejandro made a very nice analysis of villain's thought process.

And if you define "playing norm" as "playing TAG ABC style"... then I'm not saying a load of crap, I just don't play your TAG ABC style.

And one last thing to wrap it up.

Originally posted by lennonac
you made a horrible horrible play and are trying to justify it by saying he was aggro monkey.

Originally posted by lennonac
A player like this is not a thinking player imo, most of the time they are just an aggro donk, which he clearly was.

Looks like you justified it for me, unless there's a big difference between a monkey player and a donk player.

@alejandrosh: off-topic here, just out of curiosity, what does the "sh" in your nick stands for?

You did in deed ask for peoples comments in the very title of this thread.

Calling someone kid where I come from is a big insult as you are talking down to them.

I called you a fish as you donked off all your chips on a bluff.

You are obviously better than everyone here so Why bother posting?
Do we really care about your post, no not really and in my case no not at all.

I think you do what many do on here and see, oh he is only silver he must be a donk. Little do you know I play poker for a living so I think I know a little bit, I want to keep learning too which is why I am here.

You like to quote what people have written and then put them down under it.

Congrats on not paying off aggro donks by bluffing with your whole stack. I won't comment anything else about the hand with you because it seems you look at my opinions as attacks, so I won't even bother.

I never said I was better than anyone. But I'm definetely better than a lot of players.

I didn't ask for people's comments anywhere... if you think I did in the title of the thread, than why didn't you answer the question on the title?

(For those who responded seriously and contributed to a productive discussion, I'll say it again, I appreciate your comments)

I'm sorry if I have no idea where you come from and would feel insulted because I called you a kid.

Again you're saying things I never said.
I never said anything about your silver status because it really doesn't say anything about your poker skills. And never thought anything about it either, or else I would've taken Swiss' words as holy truth because he's a diamond member.
But among the other members who posted in this thread you were the only one who attacked me from the very first post and never really bothered to explain why you would play the hand in a certain way.
Even though Alejandro never posted why he'd fold PF, he never came attacking anyone either.
Now take a look at Swiss' and NightFrosta's posts and then take a look at yours and see the difference.
You didn't express your thoughts on why you'd play the hand in a certain way, the first thing you did in your first post was call me a fish, therefore attacking me from the very first moment and probably not even thinking about starting a productive discussion (and you didn't), now because I commit the crime of calling you a kid, you get all upset and start saying things I've never said.
Now you sir are acting like a kid and making this thread go completely off-topic.

And yes, I do like to quote people to make posts more organized... but you seem to think otherwise.